Assessing Effectiveness and Reliability in Prototype Development

Robust testing and evaluation processes are important for learning from both the successes and the failures in prototype development. Dr. John Granier, chief engineer of munitions and energetics at Element U.S. Space and Defense, along with Dr. Michelle Pantoya, J.W. Wright Regents Chair in mechanical engineering and professor at Texas Tech, spoke with Machine Design about the importance of rigorous protocols to ensure that newly developed solutions are effective and reliable.

In this fourth part of a five-part series, Granier and Pantoya talk about their testing processes, lessons learned from past experiences and the perspectives of professionals in related fields.

We learn that Element adopts a structured approach to assessing prototypes, influenced heavily by the specific requirements set by their clients. This entails creating detailed test plans that align with the standards of performance and reliability expected in the defense sector. “The schedule is the dictator,” Granier said, noting the need for meticulous planning and execution to collect valuable data before the opportunity is lost.

Learning from Testing Failures

Failures during testing are an inevitable aspect of the prototyping process. And offer valuable lessons for future endeavors. A generic example discussed in this. Interview reflects how extreme environmental conditions can lead to unexpected outcomes in energetic systems. For example, when subjecting a design to high or low temperatures, the anticipated detonation sequence may fail, highlighting deficiencies in the prototype design related to chemistry or geometry.

Such experiences underscore the importance of iterative development. The feedback loop created by testing failures encourages a return to the drawing board where engineers can refine their designs based on empirical evidence. This iterative process aids in improving the prototype and contributes to the overarching aim of developing safer and more reliable technologies.

Contrasting the defense sector's high-pressure environment, Pantoya notes that the academic field often views failures as essential learning opportunities. In mechanical engineering research, experiments are aimed at contributing to scientific knowledge rather than product development. She says that even unsuccessful attempts can yield insights that benefit future research and applications. This perspective fosters a culture of continuous improvement, ensuring that no effort is wasted.

Watch additional parts of this interview series with Dr. John Granier and Dr. Michelle Pantoya:

Part 1: Forging the Future of Defense with Modern Methodologies

Part 2: The Role of Advanced Sensors in Propellant Technology

Part 3: Prototyping Solutions for the Defense Industry

Part 5: The Future of Defense Engineering: Trends and Insights

Editor’s Note: Machine Design’s WISE (Workers in Science and Engineering) hub compiles our coverage of workplace issues affecting the engineering field, in addition to contributions from equity seeking groups and subject matter experts within various subdisciplines.